I find it fascinating for the older generation to have gotten a college degree with little or no debt, then for me to be crippled with debt to get the EXACT SAME DEGREE just for the sin of being born later than them. And then they have the nerve to turn around and blame this all on the younger generation
Right? Like, us being born somehow made everything more expensive? I mean, I guess demand on resources goes up with the population... but not to the extent it has... we didn't ask to be born and we didn't ask for college prices to skyrocket. Money is also not exactly a concept teenagers understand. I certainly was fed the line "If you go to college you'll make enough money with your first job to pay back the loan in 10 years after". The ones in power raised those prices from greed. We didn't make them greedy. But yeah, we were born more recently so, sucks to be us.
There are paths to getting a degree debt free, but I agree that it's ridiculous how much more constrained that path has become over such a short period of time.
Also a severely reduced job market. My parents entered the work force in the 70s, when unions still had power, and one working class income in a factory could keep a family of four afloat. I entered the work force May 2009 after the October 2008 global financial crash (joke's on me lol), and that was after all the outsourcing that happened in the late 90s.
Yeah, what fools I mean they forced you to take the loans. I mean their are lots of people who worked their way through collage. Where do you people think it's ok to dump your debt on us? We blame you cause you took out the loan. Simple. Who should be blamed ?{ 1 I I I I
Why is Clarence Thomas concerned about the dollar amount of the debt relief? It's not his job to balance the budget or be concerned about the budget, it's his job to interpret the law. His job is to determine if the debt cancellation is legal or not, the dollar amount of relief has nothing to do with it.
I already received an email saying the remainder of my student loan debt was forgiven. I no longer owed anything. And that was a huge relief because I wasn't going to be able to afford the payments along with rent and food. And then for some absolute soulless ghouls to step in and say "actually no, we're giving you back that debt" is infuriating beyond words. These are genuinely evil people.
They shouldn't have told you that for a fact... my lender sent an email making it clear they received my opt-in for relief and I was all set to be relieved IF the legal challenges are removed as a hurdle. It's really misleading and odd they'd frame it as already forgiven. That's another level of heartless. If you aren't paying attention to the legal issues, you'd think it's all good, only to have the rug pulled from under you.
@@DarkusZarvix It depends, if the GP was the recipient of one of those forgiveness programs due to fraud via a borrowers defense, it might be the case. But yet, if the forgiveness was through this, then it isn't official unless the court rules that it's OK to proceed.
I'd agree with the experts that, given the Solicitor General's argument, the Supreme Court should not strike down Biden's plan. However, the problem with that thinking is that it assumes the Supreme Court is an apolitical, non-partisan institution that interprets the law for what it is. In reality, we have 6 conservative activist justices that will simply vote based on ideology and personal beliefs.
Nancy Pelosi said very publicly that President Biden DOES NOT have the authority forgive any student debt. Congress must do that. 2021. Is she partisan?
The Supreme Court are Federalist Party picks thanks to mitch McConnell. Stopped Merritt Garland Obama's pick. The racist electoral college gave us Trump. TRUMP DID NOT WIN. Trump appointed the right wing judges.
Scientists: invent a cure for all cancer Government: wow! We need to make this available to everyone for free 🤡: I am $50,000 in debt from MY cancer treatment therefore I am harmed by other people getting cancer treatment for free (and definitely NOT harmed by the insurance companies that charged me tons of money for cancer treatment)
@@wf345 So which is it, people choose to be poor with no skills, or people wrongly choose to take on debt in order to get a marketable degree (so they should never be forgiven)? If you disagree with this premise, then why are you framing student loan debt as a choice?
@@SpeakerWiggin49 exactly 💯! I keep thinking about how plans fall apart from an element outside of the planner's control when attempting to even consider contingencies. @will people may come up with a plan to get out of poverty and the very plan falls apart due to circumstances outside of their control. Enough of this, "I had to deal with it, so everyone else should too"... different people have different resources and skills... some might not be able to make the connections that people who do "succeed" take for granted. When you realize that these issues are all tied together in a cultural problem, let me know.
My mom, Who owns a small business and refuses to help us pay for college, got tens of thousands of dollars of PPE loans forgiven, but is against the student loan forgiveness. She tried to make the argument that, when you take a loan, you have to pay it back, and if you can't, then that's your problem and responsibility. I pretended to be surprised told her I thought she took the PPE loan forgiveness, but if she didn't, at least she was being consistent and didn't wish her children to be in a worse situation than herself. Then my dad chimed in that she took every bit of loan forgiveness they would give her. I didn't have to hear her bitch about students getting a break after that.
@@michaeld9682 Too bad we don't teach how to balance a house budget in schools anymore. Thank Bush Jr for that. So you can't really say that when they are pushed by society to take those loans and reach for the stars. When everyone and everything in society says you should, that there is no downside to doing it as you can pay off that loan for being anything with a college degree in 5 years you don't think that hard about it, because if a society that doesn't look like it is about to collapse says to universally do something then it must be fine to do.
It's the difference between starting my career debt free or paying off $8K. It may be small but that burden adds up on people living paycheck to paycheck
@@swallman that's an extremely stupid way of thinking about it. LOTS of blue-collar workers have student loan debt. I do, $40,000 of it. Most "white collar workers" have much more than $20,000 of student loan debt, which is all that this act would waive.
"hey! why are you treating their gaping wounds when I have a boo-boo!? and in some cases A scratch that that you already stitched up and gave me morphine for!?"
I don't think that most of them care about that. Roberts does to some extent, but it's largely because he's the chief justice and ultimately he'll be remember long after the other justices are forgotten.
@@iannordin5250 they are different because they were given towards the members of congress as well as to their rich buddies, thats the only difference. This will help regular people at the expense of giant loan shark companies(who likely give very generous donations), hence they will likely try to either shoot it down or bring it down under their control.
Thats the hypocrisy, its constitutional to forgive the debts of billionaires and corporations, but it's unconstitutional to forgive the debts of the average American.
The problem is college tuition has grown many times faster than income. It was never like this before so when people say, “pay off your loan just like everyone before you” don’t understand its not same situation. Yes, we took out a crazy loan. Its our responsibility but lets make it realistic and lets make things the way they were before.
Exactly and a small pittance towards debts punishes non-spenders and not only doesn't address the issue of rising tuitions, it exacerbates it. There is also the issue that it is unconstitutional.
You can research the rise in costs and will find that the more involved government got, the higher tuitions became. Senator Joe Biden was instrumental in NOT including student loan debt in the bankruptcy laws. Research that as well.
Well here's the thing DID the cost really ever go up in the first place or did inflation erode the value of the education and the dollar? The best jobs I can ever hope to get pay around 40 to 50 an hour but in 20 years what will that buy?? Do you really think 100k Ford Explorers are EVER going to get cheaper off the line, brand new?? See real the problem?? Things just never get cheaper! Outside of a civil war, WW2 -( where everything in the EU was destroyed.) A brand government that idk somehow fixes everything? I mean do you realize the government lies about the CPI number to prevent SS retirees from getting a COLA increase, (cost of living adjustments ) each year since 1980! Sorry but we have much bigger problems here! Lol is hamber helper the same as Steak?! Serious question btw because according to the CPI basket of goods it practically is! Lol
I'm as liberal as the next guy. I think the conservative court justices are terrible and the law was pretty clear that the president has the authority to do this. I'm just saying I'm not delusional.
Veterans Benefits paid for my education and I have been paying more taxes as a result. You are going to be doing the same. It's to the benefit of our society for you yo be debt free. I'm going to be campaigning for candidates to bring back education sanity. I don't think Biden went far enough. I will fight for you.
The most aggravating part of the oral arguments for me was the judges distinguishing between "modifying" and "waiving". I was screaming to myself, "WAIVING IS A TYPE OF LOAN MODIFICATION!! YOU'RE MODIFYING THE PRINCIPLE TO BECOME $0!!!!!" lol
@SpeakerWiggin49 Lawyer? Not yet, but soon :) regardless, my issue isn't that OP's interpretation is "wrong", it's that he doesn't understand the point of statutory interpretation and considers the entire exercise "aggravating". I abhor his ignorance, not his interpretation.
I'm sick of this. WE NEED COMPLETE STUDENT LOAN DEBT FORGIVENESS! Why am I championing and hoping for a small portion to be forgiven, when I am still going to be drowning in student debt even if I am allowed to forgive/ granted $20,000?
The merits of the legal challenge to the Student Debt relief were so poor that many have already said it would be extremely difficult for the partisan "justices" to uphold it. Then again, they completely threw out the standard of requiring standing when they upheld the Texas Anti-Abortion bill so...
If the court strikes this down, after they struck down Roe, they will really cement the idea of how important it is to vote in young people. These are the things that need to be focused on when reelection comes up.
How could any court agree with Myra Brown's petition that she is being harmed by _someone_ _else_ having their loans forgiven? On its face the claim of harm is facetious at best.
I don't know if she "saved" the program but the SG did an AMAZING job. If the court makes a decision based on the merits and arguments put forth then this student loan forgiveness will happen.
I'm hopeful but not optimistic. Even if it is true that she put forward a good argument, they won't be deciding on this for months, and distance from this hearing will allow those that may have been somewhat swayed to fall right back in line.
They've gotten it down to a science. They choose the courts that they want to just push it up to the court immediately. (I'm talking about the federalist society that gave trump a list of judges that were part of their "network" he put them in, and those judges are loyal to the federalist society, not the usa)
They need the entire student loan program. Aether make it that Collages are public funded or stop with the public back loans and make it fully private, this middle of the Road is nothing But a disaster.
Yeah and limit to only to the top 10% of their peers get full rides paid by govt. Everyone else go to trade schools, go to work or pay for college themselves.
The loan programs were a compromise because the Republicans and conservative Democrat faction wouldn't expand Pell Grants back in the day. The goal should be free public college, trade school, and polytechnic education for the children of working people. Just as the children of the wealthy get to go to college without a dime of debt.
I heard the audio live. The two challengers were in fact getting grilled. I applaud Prelogar for her performance. It seemed like it was leaning towards letting the debt forgiveness ( except with Thomas, f him). I do not know why mainstream media is pushing that it was a disaster. It's almost like they heard a completely different court hearing.
This CNBC headline is infuriating because it operates on the assumption that the conservative justices on this court are open to good faith arguments. There is no evidence to support this presupposition.
I think (to save themselves any grief) SCOTUS may just dismiss the case on lack of standing due to the state acting on behalf of MOHELA. Both Justice Jackson and Barrett questioned the standing multiple times. Could be a way out for them.
That just means someone else will come in as a strawman and pretend to be harmed by student loan forgiveness. Hopefully the debt can be discharged immediately before another corrupt, unqualified maga judge can order a stay.
Some people act like loan forgiveness isn't a thing. Like everybody in history has had to pay back every loan ever given. Loans are forgiven every day for any number of reasons. But let's pick on college students who went through an economically crippling pandemic for some reason.
The legal argument is unquestionable but the main question is will the judges vote based on personal feewies or on legal merits? I think without a shadow of a doubt they'll ignore all legal basis and vote on their political beliefs. It's unfortunately going to be dead in the water no matter how good the legal arguments are. We are screwed...
That why the other side just showed and looked unprepared. They know as well as the rest of us. The Republicans on the bench are already against it and there is no magical argument that will change it.
What is the legal basis to take my money, by force, and provide it to any individual? All public assistance provided by the central government is unconstitutional.
@@diggernash1 literally the rich need to be taxed higher. They alone could pay for this. But America will continue to be greedy and stupid. Most of our problems would be solved by busting conservative policies that take advantage of lower income people.
All speculation until a decision is made, but, the arguments made were pretty clear about it being well within the defined authorities provided by the HEROES Act. There were also questions raised about why Nebraska, et al is filing grievance on behalf of a servicer, who hasn't really made a stink about this at all. Looking at that from a historical perspective, they'd have to rule against themselves on the matter of standing. That's not really been mentioned, but it's a fucking guillotine to Nebraska's case.
I wonder who are the 2 "students" that are so harmed by debt forgiveness that they held back 200,000 other student borrowers. Edits: it was Alexander Taylor and Myra Brown. Found out JCN, Koch brothers and Walton family were also involved in this.
@@jobturkey7418 I read up on Myra Brown just now. She got private student loan which the plan does not include, although Biden tried to include it. She also got $30k on PPP loan and was forgiven! So she did benefits from loan forgiveness. She was upset because didn’t get the full $50k. Alexander Taylor was the other guy who got upset because he couldn’t get the full $20,000 only the $10,000 forgiveness. Hearing the reason why these 2 block aids to 200,000 others is madness inducing. They were not even present in court. Also the states and organization that sued are backed by special interest like billionaire Koch brothers, the Walton family, Betsy Devos, JCN group they make money on student loans. They claimed it was about government over-reaching yet JCN (the group that is active blocking student loan) got debt forgiven in the PPP loan, tax cuts too were ignored, corporate welfare, no legal challenges. But when it comes to students then it is government over-reaching. Source: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ENHTb5N6Yw4.html jcnf.org/fighting-against-government-overreach-in-the-biden-administrations-student-loan-bailout/
“They can’t have financial freedom because we need them to be dependent on the government so they keep voting for us!” - Democrats Lol you sure you wanna keep playing these “left/right,” “dem/republican” games? Because I promise: you’re deep on the losing side.
Can we talk about how the government forgave the PPP loans (which costed more than the student loan relief) and no one kicked up a fuss? Will this mean that I can sue the government for offering more benefits to a business in the same way they’re arguing “equality” to stop the loan forgiveness? The suits literally make no sense
For my daughter, we’re going to figure out a way to pay for her school if she decides to go. I will do everything in power to make sure that she doesn’t go into debt. Our education system is a joke.
America: We can't do a damn thing if a single billionaire objects. Inversely, the only way anything ever gets done is a billionaire supports it (no matter how unpopular it might be).
I’ve worked in student loan servicing. Private loans are basically like going into a bank and getting a loan. They rarely are ever waived, even if the school, such as ITT Tech, loses its accreditation and you cannot complete your diploma or certificate. There’s a number of ways public loans can be waived through various programs and to rule against this now would make all of those also illegal. Without those programs, we’re going to have less medical staff because that won’t be attracting people to pursue that career. If anything, it’ll drive people away from those careers.
Sometimes the justices /appellate judges ask questions just to ask questions, to see if the attorney can think on their feet and have thought of the other issues. The questions are not always indicative of how an appellate judge will rule.
All that corporations lobbyists 💰 others money 💰 etc couldn't have gone to college so many students scholarships instead 🔼 that is so digusting and cruel 🤯
Let’s just apply this logic to something a bit more familiar: Imagine the Supreme Court saying “Well this law says you are entitled to food stamps, but is that fair to people who make enough to not qualify for food stamps? No I don’t think so, so I’m going to rule that poor people getting food stamps was not the literal or originality intent of the law that says ‘poor people get food stamps,’ and I’m going to rule in favor of the rich people suing to take food stamps away from poor people because ‘what about me,’ because I’m a literalist / originalist. Also judicial activism is bad.”
So if POTUS does anything that gives anyone financial relief of any kind I can sue and claim to have been injured if I didn’t also get the same amount of money?
Elizabeth Prelogar is a great Solicitor General and even though this case is likely lost she'd still be a great nominee if Thomas or Alito were to kick the bucket
I listen to the whole court session and I came away optimistic also, I try to listen a lot of supreme Court cases and the attacks against the proposal were definitely weak. The conservative judges didn't have much to work with.
_”The plan doesn’t change anything about my situation, therefore enacting it causes me harm I wouldn’t otherwise suffer.”_ Umm… that’s not how that works…
Unbelievable dead beats are fighting for the responsible people to pay their bills. I paid my student loans off, I saved every paycheck since my children were born to pay for theirs and you dead beats want me to pay yours too. F THAT
@@harrisd1983 I’d be cool with that. Rather have my taxes go to debt relief than some pentagon general’s coke habit, or building bigger, more expensive fighter jets that fail to fly, or funding the FBI to do psy ops on BLM protesters.
@@harrisd1983 Just stop with that. Those loans don't keep accumulating interest as you make payments on them. Student loans are completely different than private credit loans.
@R.A. ok. The students agreed to those terms. They didn't need to take the loans out. They could've worked like people before them. BTW I agree that students shouldn't have to pay back those loans. I just think the money should come from the colleges themselves. The colleges make enough money from sports and could come up with the rest from worthless departments to pay it back.
The benefit might be that though SCOTUS is highly unlikely to not strike it down the more of the legal profession agrees that would seem a wrong opinion that would help. Not like a think that'll change anything for years but eventually it will.
You say nobody is damaged but if that were the case then nobody would be damaged for cancelling all debt held by the government. That doesn't really make sense.
From what I've read in this case, it seems like Justice Barrett may support dismissing the case, but there needs to be one more justice that flips over in order for the student loans forgiveness to go through. It is clear that the conservatives have no standing to even bring the case before the court, but it happened and here we are.
